Scholars now recognize that people tend to maintain family ties to their country of origin. This happens at the same time when these people become integrated into the next country they live in. in the new country, the immigrants incorporate and endure transnational practices that may not be antithetical but processes that mutually inform each other (Levitt & Glick, 2004). These attachments are normally the purview of the first generation. Their children are not unlikely to engage with the same intensity and frequency in their ancestral homes nor will they be as influenced by homeland values and practices. That is why the black generation that were taken to the U.S have slightly dropped the values that there African fore fathers had. In the process of doing this, they have not fully acquired the western values but have merged them to their interest.
The current families have been fighting for equality among men, women and children which was not so in the African tradition, they have also developed new religious beliefs but they have maintained the family ties shaped by values, ideas, and practices that they have received from the multiple sites and the levels of the transnational social fields they are inhabiting now. It is that the immigrants tend to bring homeland values, ideas, and social relations to bear on their encounters with the new institutions which imbue them with opportunities and obstacles.
Religious and power and status characterize family networks that cross borders this is because migrants need to maintain ties, so that they have social contacts and support that should they need to return home, kin networks can be used exploitatively. The process of transnational class differentiation is more prosperous and it extracts labor from persons defined as kin. Their transnational moral religion normally involves putting family first, such as looking up for kin-based approaches that would help them collectively in mobility or in marriage to the right kinship network to accumulate social capital in the host society.
Thinking about the social boundaries of life, it becomes clear that the incorporation of individuals into nation-states and transnational connections are not contradictory social processes. Simultaneity, living incorporated into daily activities, religion, routines, and institutions located both in a destination country and transnational relation is the reality for increasing numbers of migrants and their descendents. Since the young generation will be socialized primarily by the institutions in the countries where they live, and their mobility prospects primarily shaped by these as well, they also have access to ideas, social networks, and social capital in their ancestral homes that can strongly influence their life trajectories. This root presents ethnography of simultaneity which reveals the cross-border construction of gender, religion, generation, and right and wrong (Levitt & Glick, 2004). How the children of immigrants come to understand c lass, race, ethnic, and religious diversity, and what they want to do about it, are also composites of their experiences in the U.S. and their ancestral homes. Using a transnational lens to understand the migration experience, reveals that the lives of immigrants and their children are controlled by the religious activities they encounter in the destination. This has made me change my attitudes toward people over all, I have realized that people of all races are beautiful and that race does not make any one any better than other since we can all achieve all social related values.